Outdoor recreation in ecosystem service accounting: pilot accounts from Finland

References

• Barton DN, Obst C, Day B, Caparrós A, Dadvand P, Fenichel E, Havinga I, Hein L, McPhearson T, Randrup T, Zulian G. 2019. Discussion paper 10: recreation services from ecosystems. Paper submitted to the Expert Meeting on Advancing the Measurement of Ecosystem Services for Ecosystem Accounting, New York, 22-24 January 2019 and subsequently revised. Version of 25 March 2019. Available at: https://seea.un.org/events/expert-meeting-advancing-measurement-ecosystem-services-ecosystem-accounting.
   Google Scholar
• Caparrós A, Campos P, Montero C. 2003. An operative framework for total Hicksian income measurement: application to a multiple use forest. Environ Resour Econ. 26:173–198. doi: 10.1023/A:1026306832349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caparrós A, Oviedo J, Álvarez A, Campos P. 2017. Simulated exchange values and ecosystem accounting: theory and application to free access recreation. Ecol Econ. 139:140–149. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daily G, Polasky S, Goldstein J, Kareiva P, Mooney H, Pejchar L, Ricketts T, Salzman J, Shallenberger R. 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front Ecol Environ. 7:21–28. doi: 10.1890/080025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Groot R, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L. 2010. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services in values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Comp. 7:260–272. doi: 10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Droste N, Bartkowski B. 2018. Ecosystem service valuation for national accounting: a Reply to Obst, Hein and Edens. Environ Resour Econ. 71:205–215. doi: 10.1007/s10640-017-0146-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development: Europe Investing in rural areas. 2018. Vuotuinen täytäntöönpanokertomus Manner-Suomen maaseudun kehittämisohjelma 2014-2020. https://www.maaseutu.fi/uploads/manner-suomen-maaseudun-kehittamisohjelman-2014-2020-raportti-vuodelta-2017.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission, International Monetary Fund, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, United Nations, World Bank. 2009. System of National Accounts 2008 (SNA 2008). New York. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/nationalaccount/docs/SNA2008.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Finnish Environment Institute. 2019. Pintavesien ekologinen ja kemiallinen tila. www.ymparisto.fi/pintavesientila [accessed 8. 4. 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Finnish Environment Institute. 2020. Vesitilannekartat: Jäänpaksuus. http://wwwi2.ymparisto.fi/i2/90/hice2/vesitilanne.html [accessed 8.4.2020]. Finnish Meteorological Institute 2020. Jäätilanne.ilmatieteenlaitos.fi/jaaatilanne.
   Google Scholar
• Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE). Vesitilannekartat: Järven jäänpaksuus. wwwi2.ymparisto.fi/i2/90/hice2/vesitilanne.html.
   Google Scholar
• Forest protection, Official Statistics of Finland (OSF). Natural Resources Institute Finland, https://stat.luke.fi/en/forest-protection.
   Google Scholar
• Hanes-Young R, Potschin MB. 2017. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1. Guidance on the application of the revised structure. Barton in Fabis, Nottingham.
   Google Scholar
• Hänninen H, Karppinen H, Leppänen J. 2011. Suomalainen metsänomistaja 2010. Metlan työraportteja 441.
   Google Scholar
• Jäppinen J-P, Heliölä J. 2015. Towards a sustainable and genuinely green economy. The value and social significance of ecosystem services in Finland (TEEB for Finland). Synthesis and roadmap. The Finnish Environment 1en/2015. The Finnish Ministry of Environment, Helsinki. 144 p.
   Google Scholar
• Karjalainen E. 2006. The visual preferences for forest regeneration and field afforestation - four case studies in Finland. University of Helsinki, Faculty of Biosciences. Dissertationes Forestales 31.
   Google Scholar
• Karjalainen E, Komulainen M. 1999. The visual effect of felling on small- and medium-scale landscapes in north-eastern Finland. J Environ Manag. 55:167–181. doi: 10.1006/jema.1998.0238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosenius A-K, Haltia E, Horne P, Kniivilä M, Saastamoinen O. 2013. Value of ecosystem services? Examples and experiences on forests, peatlands, agricultural lands, and freshwaters in Finland. PTT Reports 244.
   Google Scholar
• Lankia T. 2020. The economic value of the priceless: revealing the benefits of outdoorrecreation in Finland. Doctoral dissertation. University of Helsinki. Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry. Doctoral Programme in Sustainable Use of Renewable Natural Resources. https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/311912.
   Google Scholar
• Lankia T, Kopperoinen L, Pouta E, Neuvonen M. 2015. Valuing recreational ecosystem service flow in Finland. J Outdoor Recreat Tour. 10:14–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jort.2015.04.006
   Google Scholar
• Lankia T, Neuvonen M, Pouta E. 2019. Effects of water quality changes on the recreation benefits of swimming in Finland: Combined travel cost and contingent behavior model. Water Resour Econ. 25:2–12. doi: 10.1016/j.wre.2017.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laurila L, Kalliola R. 2008. Rakennetut meren rannat 2005. Ympäristöministeriön raportteja 3 2008. 56s.
   Google Scholar
• LIPAS. https://www.lipas.fi/liikuntapaikat [accessed 20.8.2018].
   Google Scholar
• Mäkisara K, Katila M, Peräsaari J. 2019. The Multi-Source National Forest Inventory of Finland – methods and results 2015. Natural Resources Institute Finland 57 p.
   Google Scholar
• Metsähallitus. Visitation numbers in protected areas of Finland [accessed 6.4.2020]. https://www.metsa.fi/web/en/visitationnumbers.
   Google Scholar
• Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Millenium ecosystem assessment, ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of the Environment. 2019. Everyman’s right in Finland [accessed 19.8.2019]. https://www.ym.fi/en-US/Latest_News/Publications/Everymans_right_in_Finland (4484).
   Google Scholar
• National database of sport facilities. Routes for outdoor activities and recreation areas, University of Jyväskylä.
   Google Scholar
• National Land Survey of Finland. Topographic Database, 11/2018 https://www.maanmittauslaitos.fi/en/maps-and-spatial-data/expert-users/product-descriptions/topographic-database Referred 20.8.2018.
   Google Scholar
• Natural Resources Institute Finland. 2018. Forest resources. https://stat.luke.fi/en/forest-resources [accessed 9.8.2019].
   Google Scholar
• Natural Resources Institute Finland. 2019. Forest protection. https://stat.luke.fi/en/forest-protection [accessed 7.4.2020].
   Google Scholar
• Neuvonen M, Sievänen T, Fronzek S, Lahtinen I, Veijalainen N, Carter TR. 2015. Vulnerability of cross-country skiing to climate change in Finland – an interactive mapping tool. J Outdoor Recreat Tour. 11:64–79. doi: 10.1016/j.jort.2015.06.010
   Google Scholar
• Obst C, Hein L, Edens B. 2016. National accounting and the valuation of ecosystem assets and their services. Environ Resour Econ. 64:1–23. doi: 10.1007/s10640-015-9921-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ovaskainen V, Neuvonen M, Pouta E. 2012. Modelling recreation demand with respondent-reported driving cost and stated cost of travel time: a Finnish case. J For Econ. 18:3030–3317.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paracchini ML, Zulian G, Kopperoinen L, Maes J, Schägner JP, Termansen M, Zandersen M, Perez-Soba M, Scholefield P, Bidoglio G. 2014. Mapping cultural ecosystem services: a framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across EU. Ecol Indic. 45:371–385. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.04.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pietilä M, Neuvonen M, Borodulin K, Korpela K, Sievänen T, Tyrväinen L. 2015. Relationships between exposure to urban green spaces, physical activity and self-rated health. J Outdoor Recreat Tour. 10:44–54. doi: 10.1016/j.jort.2015.06.006
   Google Scholar
• Pouta E, Neuvonen M, Sievänen T. 2009. Participation in cross-country skiing in Finland under climate change: application of multiple hierarchy stratification perspective. J Leis Res. 41:91–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puustinen J, Pouta E, Sievänen T, Neuvonen M. 2009. Visits to national parks and the provision of natural and man-made recreation and tourism resources. J Ecotourism. 8:18–31. doi: 10.1080/14724040802283210
   Google Scholar
• Pyky R, Neuvonen M, Kangas K, Ojala A, Lanki T, Borodulin K, Tyrväinen L. 2019. Individual and environmental factors associated with green exercise in urban and suburban areas. Health Place. 55:20–28. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Remme RP, Edens B, Schröter M, Hein L. 2015. Monetary accounting of ecosystem services: a test case for Limburg province, the Netherlands. Ecol Econ. 112:116–128. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.02.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal D. 1987. The necessity for substitute prices in recreation demand analyses. Am J Agric Econ. 69:828–837. doi: 10.2307/1242194
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schröter M, Barton DN, Remme RP, Hein L. 2014. Accounting for capacity and flow of ecosystem services: a conceptual model and a case study for Telemark, Norway. Ecol Indic. 36:539–551. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.09.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen A, Hardwood AR, Bateman IJ, Munday P, Crowe A, Brander L, Raychaudhuri J, Lovett AA, Foden J, Provins A. 2014. Economic assessment of the recreational value of ecosystems: methodological development and national and local application. Environ Resource Econ. 57:233–249. doi: 10.1007/s10640-013-9666-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sievänen T, Neuvonen M. 2011. Luonnon virkistyskäyttö 2010. Metlan työraportteja 212. Metsäntutkimuslaitos, Vantaa.
   Google Scholar
• Siikamäki P, Kangas K. 2015. Biodiversity attracts visitors to national parks. Biodivers. Conserv. 24:2521–2534. doi: 10.1007/s10531-015-0941-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvennoinen H. 2017. Metsämaiseman kauneus ja metsänhoidon vaikutus koettuun maisemaan metsikkötasolla. Dissertationes Forestales 242. https://doi.org/10.14214/df.242.
   Google Scholar
• Tyrväinen L, Silvennoinen H, Hallikainen V. 2017. Effect of the season and forest management on the visual quality of the nature-based tourism environment: a case from Finnish Lapland. Scand J For Res. 32(4):349–359. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2016.1241892
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. 2017. Technical recommendations in support of the system of environmental-economic accounting 2012 – experimental ecosystem accounting. New York: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations, European Union. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, World Bank Group 2014. System of Environmental-Economic Accounting. Experimental Ecosystem Accounting, United Nations, New York, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Vallecillo S, La Notte A, Polce C, Zulian G, Alexandris N, Ferrini S, Maes J. 2018. Ecosystem services accounting: Part I – Outdoor recreation and crop pollination, EUR 29024 EN; Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2018, doi:10.2760/619793, JRC110321.
   Google Scholar
• Vallecillo S, La Notte A, Zulian G, Ferrini S, Maes J. 2019. Ecosystem services accounts: Valuing the actual flow of nature-based recreation from ecosystems to people. Ecol Modell. 392:196–311. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.09.023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veijalainen N. 2012. Estimation of climate change impacts on hydrology and floods in Finland. Aalto University publication series Doctoral Dissertations 55, pp. 211.
   Google Scholar
• Vihervaara P, Järvenpää E, Mattsson T, Mononen L, Kortelainen P, Oinonen S, Saikkonen L, Holmberg M, Akujärvi A, Bergström I, et al. 2018. Towards ecosystem accounting based on innovations and insights on natural capital knowledge. FINLAND. Eurostat Grant 2017, Final report. 64 p.https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/b01d2930-990e-44fb-9121-a9a6b00a1283/library/2403d31e-e57f-44f3-85b6-892d89986d7a/details.
   Google Scholar